Persons with disabilities would have to walk all the way down to Lake Street in order to crash Chicago. I am not sure of the level of parallel traffic at the recommended stop. Terrible traffic is essential for crossing a busy street like Chicago. Parral traffic allows a blind person to be certain that they are lining up correctly to cross the street.

Persons with disabilities would have to walk all the way down to Lake Street in order to crash Chicago. I am not sure of the level of parallel traffic at the recommended stop. Terrible traffic is essential for crossing a busy street like Chicago. Parral traffic allows a blind person to be certain that they are lining up correctly to cross the street.

Visual image for reference to the crosswalk at the existing transit station stoplight.

Thanks for the info about the crosswalks. I really hope the city of Minneapolis thinks about putting in an audible pedestrian signal there. Being that there is no parallel traffic, it would be a good place for one.

In the recent Strib article about the D-Line. It was mentioned that the current #5 bus gets roughly 19,000 weekday riders. I knew it was in that range, but now with a number behind it, we can do some fun math.

The #5 bus travels (by my estimate) about 19.5 route miles, carrying 19,000 weekday riders, or about 975 riders per route mile. This is more than the light rail systems of Sacramento, Pittsburgh, San Jose, and Baltimore. The #5 bus' total ridership is greater than the light rail systems of Buffalo and Charlotte.

This aBRt upgrade cannot come soon enough. With just a small increase in ridership from the conversion, this single aBRT route could perhaps pass St. Louis and Dallas' LRT systems in riders per route mile, and Newark, Pittsburgh, and Baltimore in total riders carried.

I've been wondering how this line is going to stay on schedule as it goes southbound from HCMC to Lake Street. For the past two weeks I've taken the 94 from St. Paul leaving at 3:30, gotten off at HCMC, and tried to either walk or take the 5 all the way to S 35th St. Because cars have been backed up all the way to 14th St in Elliot Park, I've usually just walked (in some cases boarding and then getting off the 5 after a few blocks and in others simply walking from the start) and I've beaten the 5 to Lake St every day.

This does not seem to have anything to do with the bike lanes on 26th and 28th (I can tell as I walk past each day). It does seem to have a lot to do with the signal timing at Franklin Ave (cycling too quickly going north/south and too slowly east/west) and with the intense traffic at Lake and Chicago. I find it hard to believe that some signal priority (not sure if that is really the right term here) and limited stops will make up for the parking lot-like traffic from 14th to Franklin and 26th to Lake St.

Does anyone know if this is more of a temporary condition caused by construction? If not, is there something else that needs to be done to ensure buses on this line actually move as quickly as planned (and likely advertised)? Would removing parking from 26th to Lake St. make a difference? Traffic is a beast on Lake at this same time of day (I previously rode the 53 but it kept being delayed so long that it is actually faster to take the 94 to downtown MPLS and walk all the way to Lake St!). As such, I can't imagine changing signal timing would make a difference. I question whether re-orienting the Lake St/Chicago transit station would impact it all that much, either, as buses actually seem to move through fairly well. Thoughts?

Currently, I think the slowdown is because of the closure of Portland at the Greenway, and also at 94. Portland traffic is detoured over to Chicago on 28th St and that has had an impact on the Chicago/Lake intersection and the Chicago/Transit Center intersection. That being said, Chicago is generally pretty backed up around Lake at rush hour. More than anything, limiting the number of stops is going to help the D Line run faster than the 5. At rush hour you can almost guarantee a stop at every single block until Lake, and a long stop at Franklin because of transfers.

I am not knowledgeable enough about the TPP process to know if this is just a reflection that the D line does not have all the funding lined up or if it means the Metro Council does not view this as a top priority. Either way it is disheartening the difficulty these abrt lines seem to have getting funding especially considering how much less they cost per rider compared to most of the other transit projects planned in the metro.

What a mistake that would be. The D-Line is the best transit project currently underway in the Twin Cities. It will improve travel for an enormous number of people, many of whom do not own cars, and for a fraction of the cost of either LRT route.

If the DFL is able to take back the statehouse, securing more funding for transit expansion has to be a top priority. The region's transit vision should be getting more ambitious, not less. The idea that the region wouldn't be able to implement the D-Line by 2040 is laughably sad.

Jesus Christ I thought people were complaining about the Met Council being too progressive. This right here proves they're not progressive enough. I know they have to work with budgets, but come on, it doesn't cost anything to be very progressive with your plans. These ABRT routes were supposed to be rolled out with one opening each year, but now the busiest bus line in the metro may not get it for a decade?! Pathetic.

I have taken the five through downtown and at least a few occasions. There seems to be times when it gets really backed up and 7th/8th Street. How will the bus rapid transit system help with that? I realize that people will be able to pay their fair prior to getting on the bus, but I'm not sure if that's going to really help the slow moving crawl through downtown.

Don't get me wrong, I am a huge fan of arterial bus rapid transit. I want to see more of these built and faster.

I have taken the five through downtown and at least a few occasions. There seems to be times when it gets really backed up and 7th/8th Street. How will the bus rapid transit system help with that? I realize that people will be able to pay their fair prior to getting on the bus, but I'm not sure if that's going to really help the slow moving crawl through downtown.

Don't get me wrong, I am a huge fan of arterial bus rapid transit. I want to see more of these built and faster.

My regular bus line (not in MN) recently added the option for monthly pass holders to board using proof-of-payment (i.e., just get on the bus without tapping). It's made boarding way faster. Not only does it remove the bottleneck of everyone trying to use one farebox, but it also means they can board from all three doors instead of just the front. At a busy stop this can cut minutes off of boarding time.

It's true that it doesn't do much for traffic--that's another problem that's also worth addressing--but these aggregate savings can still add up to a huge time improvement and reliability boost.

You couldn't ask for a better example of how messed up this region's transit priorities are. ABRT routes like the D-Line, Midtown, Nicollet, Hennepin, etc should be funded before lower ridership corridors that primarily serve the suburbs or new park and rides.

Also, the slideshow shows bus ridership declining quite a bit since 2013 and still being below 2005 levels. Is that just due to the Green Line opening?

I have taken the five through downtown and at least a few occasions. There seems to be times when it gets really backed up and 7th/8th Street. How will the bus rapid transit system help with that? I realize that people will be able to pay their fair prior to getting on the bus, but I'm not sure if that's going to really help the slow moving crawl through downtown.

I'm guessing the BRTs will have signal priority, which should help improve flow to some degree downtown.